Hacker News Reader

Comment by khawkins | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, advocating for taking steps against disseminating propaganda, then citing Vox as a legitimate news source, concerns me. I wouldn't trust you to be able to draw the line between propaganda and objective writing. How much censorship of opposing views would be done in the name of fighting "Russian propaganda"?

View on HN

Of course, you can't exactly claim Vox isn't a legitimate news source without citing some sources either.

(Whether or not Vox is "legitimate" or not is beside the point here, the point is it's hypocritical of you to call someone's sources into question without providing any yourself.)

Your post is a clear example of an ad hominem and whataboutism [1], an invalid argument, where you cite the usage of a link to Vox to completely dismiss the parent as untrustworthy.

[1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Whataboutism

There's an object-level point that can be made about referencing an even more partisan source like Rationalwiki as a response in this particular thread, but the more interesting meta-level observation is that the whole Wikipedia sourcing/attribution mechanism is clearly inadequate for an age where even a fairly casual discussion in HN comments can't be completed without relying on sources that one of the two parties to the debate will consider clearly inadmissible (Vox and Rationalwiki for one side, and maybe Craig Murray and Sputnik for the other).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com